No offense but the Type 81C does not make any sense to increase it’s BR. Yes its a fantastic AA but it gets no Radar or other form of counrering long range guided missiles like what it already faces from helicopters and planes. The updated BR will toss it into an even worse bracket.
Again its a fastastic AA, but entirely depends on your ability to see and launch your missiles at targets without any form of assistance. A player that knows you’re up and scanning can easily sneak by and hit you with a guided missile, etc.
Genuinely don’t see this as any sort of positive addition when it just hurts japanese 11.3 ground, a relatively popular battle rating to play.
Reason: the T64B has good optics, though lackign thermals. Decent speed and mobility bar the reverse rate for the 9.7 BR.
On top of this it has effective composites and of course the 125mm 3BM42 which is a good round even for 10.7 tanks.
The fact it stays at 9.7 while all the other 9.7s have moved to 10.0 is quite strange
(shir 2 included which has access to a round with over 70 penetration more.)
Already commented on it, but forgot to mention, the Type 81C only gets a lock range of ~6km. Literal 9.3 missile AA (Santal) while worse in Gs, has the same lock range.
Does an AA with the same lock range as a 9.3 vehicle belong at 11.7 even if its missiles are fanstastic? Not to mention that same 9.3 AA has an actual radar for giving a heads up for vehicles?
Again, please don’t raise its BR, it genuinely does not deserve such a change.
Reasoning: Given the high CM amounts of CAS planes at this BR, and the potency of SPAA systems, the J37C is the only usable CAP platform at this BR range, however bringing it in your lineup exposes you to a full uptier to 12.0, a death sentence for your normally 10.7 lineup. The J37C has only weak unguided rockets for ground attack, and not many of them, and will make no noticeable impact against ground targets, but will allow sweden to counter CAS with competent CAP.
my suggestion:
Mode: Air Realistic
Aircraft: F/A-18A
BR: 12.3 → 12.7
Armament changes: +Give Aim-7P
+Have the full ability to take 6 Aim-7s+2 9L
+Guided munitions (mavericks)
I think F/A-18A is too powerful at 12.3. I think it would be better suited at 12.7, but with similar armament as F/A-18C Early (4 wing slots for Aim7, guided ground munitions). I don’t think just for having three hornets at three different BRs we should have the F/A-18A facing 11.3 jets.
i swear to god we need a #stopuptieringisraelivehicles because i see an uptier left and right but still no armor at all
for god’s sake, give it some armor, or make it go down in BR, its stupid that alot of tanks can pen the merkava even 3-4 BR’s lower sometimes even more.
TBF most aircrafts at 12.3 are a slop and the hornet is only marginally overpowered. There were posts about it above.
GR.7: subsonic radarless CAS platform that does have AIM-9Ls
GR.4: a literal flying brick and basically cant do anything other than bombing in air battles
JH-7A: for a better FM trades all IRCCM missiles
K2K: a phantom with all aspects
EJK: a phantom with all aspects as well
T-64B should move like the others MBT in the same battle rating (10.0).
T-72M/A should move up too, if the Merkava are moving it. (9.7)
Belgepanzer 57, same way. (9.7)
T-72AV should move 10.7 minimum like others premium MBT. ( and here you’re missing something important : thermal is Gen 2/3, with nato tank hunting capacity (Commander/gunner can shot).
Here’s the thing though, that 6.0 sec reload is the irl reload. The shir 2 which I love, should stay 9.7, I don’t see it as a problem there.
The mobility is pretty even for the shir / T64B
But I feel the AMX is going up because certain demographics that are known to cheat, like to use it in mass because it’s a good vehicle. I have no experience in it personally, but I’ve seen it do some consistently good work.